• Welcome to OS2World OLD-STATIC-BACKUP Forum.
 

News:

This is an old OS2World backup forum for reference only. IT IS READ ONLY!!!

If you need help with OS/2 - eComStation visit http://www.os2world.com/forum

Main Menu

OS/2 Vs. Windows... The Debate Rages On

Started by S.SubZero, 2007.11.02, 08:49:11

Previous topic - Next topic

kim

Ouch this thread grew a bit over the last couple of days. Well, what can I say; I just hope that all of you can get along outside this thread and that there isn't any hard feelings that needs to be sorted out.

About choosing technology; It's all about personal preferences, what works best in a given situation or just that you want to pick a system that you like. There will always be something faster and better; but not always.... That's why I went back to use the good old filofax again after that I've had way too much issues and problems using Palm and Psion PDA's.

Have fun & behave!

lwriemen

Quote from: kimhav on 2007.11.11, 20:39:21
About choosing technology; It's all about personal preferences, what works best in a given situation or just that you want to pick a system that you like.
Choice was one of the points of contention in this discussion. For some reason, some of the participants still couldn't understand that there is no choice for the average computer user. Just to clarify the point, here is my profile of Joe Average, computer user.

Joe Average:
- doesn't understand the underlying technology
- wants to be able to interact with other computer users (web, email, document sharing)
- upgrades hardware by buying a new computer
- buys based on price
- wants to be able to go into <some chain> store and buy software off the shelf
- Computer choices are Mac or PC (where PC is synonymous with Windows)

Everyone starts out as Joe Average these days. When I was Joe Average (middle - high school (age 14 - 18)), there were lots of choices. My family had a VIC-20 and an Osbourne 1, but I had friends whose families had Commodore 64, Atari 800, or Apple II. In college, those choices would become DOS, Windows 3.x, OS/2, Amiga, Mac, or *NIX (Anyone remember Coherent?). Joe Average could go into any <chain store> and buy software for his computer choice. This is comparable to the gaming console market we have today.

Competition was exciting and healthy for the computing market/industry. I figure anyone who buys into the Microsoft FUD line, that competition meant no one could share any data, is either too young to remember when competition existed, or  was stuck in a company where departments with different computer systems had trouble sharing data.

From my point of view, sharing data meant finding a common format. If one didn't exist, then a business opportunity existed. These opportunities were being exploited, which means that eventually standards would supercede incompatibilities. 

os2monkey

Quote from: lwriemen on 2007.11.15, 15:25:17
Choice was one of the points of contention in this discussion. For some reason, some of the participants still couldn't understand that there is no choice for the average computer user. Just to clarify the point, here is my profile of Joe Average, computer user.
For the most part I agree with you with your profile of the average joe computer user, but I don't agree with you that to be one is not a choice.
Let's look at your list:
- doesn't understand the underlying technology
No one "made me" learn underlying technology, I choose to invest myself into it. When I was younger I read many books on both hardware and software and as such am more comfortable then the average Joe with it.
So yes most people choose to not invest the resources into learning.. but that's a choice. I don't know how to fix my car that well and I bring it to a mechanic, so yes I'm not empowered but I choose not to be empowered to net other benefits for myself (free time).

- wants to be able to interact with other computer users (web, email, document sharing)
Which of course any operating system can do, and choosing to restrict yourself to just the mainstream one is of course a choice. :). You could argue it could be the most sensible choice for them, but it's still a choice.
- upgrades hardware by buying a new computer
Again they are "choosing" to accept the cost of disposable appliance instead of investing into learning how to fix and upgrade what they have.
- buys based on price
So they choose to prioritize price in a buying decision.
- wants to be able to go into <some chain> store and buy software off the shelf
Choosing convenience of being available now over other benefits
- Computer choices are Mac or PC (where PC is synonymous with Windows)
Choosing to not look at all of the alternatives, but just going with the flow of what is packaged up and available in retail stores or adopted by the mainstream.

I agree with you that I definately liked the days that more mainstream choices existed, but we're here because the majority of people choose to make it that way.

os2monkey

Quote from: lwriemen on 2007.11.07, 15:29:53
1) Microsoft only controls Window's standards, which often allows them to force other standards to move towards their point of view. Microsoft tends to ignore outside standards, as they don't promote platform lock-in.
Yes I understand that microsoft windows standards right now are the dominant ones, so much that they effect non windows platforms via the web and office formats. I don't disagree with that, but I do disagree that they are all powerful and not able to be thwarted. It's easier to win when one doesn't view oneself as a victim and focuses on innovating.

Quote from: lwriemen on 2007.11.07, 15:29:53
2) Using wine or emulation does nothing to erode the "application barrier to entry". The only way to erode this is to make it profitable for ISVs to develop software for alternative OSes. If people can run your Windows software on other systems, then you capture that market with no additional cost. You also don't face losing revenue to that other market.

I think you underestimate the effect of emulation in the real world.
Yes it is not a panacea that will solve everything. But the fact is it DOES make it possible for people to switch platforms without too much pain and support the future development of that new platform.
I need to run certain windows applications for my job. If there was no emulation my only choice is to either duel boot (which I hate doing so would not) or sticking with windows. This is true for many people.
Having emulation makes it possible for me to shift 90% of my computing time to the alternative os (and support the alternative os by buying software for it).
Likewise, I don't agree that it does not put pressure on the windows software companies. I have certain windows applications that I had paid revenues to upgrade each year. Now that I have switched to ECS I am actively looking for os/2 vendors to REPLACE those windows applications, therefor causing the windows vendors to loose my business.
They can choice to ignore me, but at their own detriment.
If enough other users who adopt the alternative os do the same, they can't simply can't ignore us without going out of business.
Microsoft purchased virtual pc and killed it on alternative platforms like os/2 for this reason specifically.

Quote from: lwriemen on 2007.11.07, 15:29:53
This one falls under the George Santayana quote, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Anyone want to take bets on how long before Linux's marketshare numbers are down around OS/2's after the US courts lift the sanctions against Microsoft?  ;)
The point is this is not repeating the past.
Microsoft typically creates a similiar appication, lowers the price to kill off the compition, and then raises the price.
In this case the price of the compitition is 0. They have never competed against a vendor that charges nothing and who's workers work for nearly free just for the idiologically drive to kill off microsoft :).
You think too highly of microsoft and their power, especially considering the huge movement that is as we speak in the process of chewing them up and spitting them out.
If only a few more states follow this lead, microsoft is toast, and yes I would be happy to bet you on that.
http://www.rssgov.com/gils/archives/000051.html

os2monkey

Also I read an article recently interviewing young microsoft executives, and they basically admitted very softly that they knew microsoft's dominance in software was no longer certain and that is why they branced out to consumer electronics such as the xbox and zune player. If they themselves are not so sure of themselves in standing up against the open source movement, why are you? :)

BigWarpGuy

Quote from: os2monkey on 2007.11.16, 06:23:50
Also I read an article recently interviewing young microsoft executives, and they basically admitted very softly that they knew microsoft's dominance in software was no longer certain and that is why they branced out to consumer electronics such as the xbox and zune player. If they themselves are not so sure of themselves in standing up against the open source movement, why are you? :)

This could be why MS is talking about lawsuites against open source even though they have yet to mention which patents have been infringed upon. If they did not consider open source a threat to MS, they would not even care about it; IMO.  8)

I think there is enough of a market for more than one operating system.  ;D 

RobertM

While I agree with os2monkey on a lot of his points, something I think we should keep in mind is that many people in this day and age do not realize there is a choice for Operating Systems (or even browsers for that matter). During my years in retail, we had numerous customers who wanted a MAC thinking a MAC was Windows - simply because it is a computer, then decided they DIDNT want a MAC because "it isnt a computer" [because "it doesnt run" Windows (regardless of it's ability to do so with BootCamp or Parallels)].

So, while what os2monkey says is true, it does not fit the real world "Average Joe User" scenarios as they currently exist. MS has done a great job of "equating" the following:

A computer=Windows
The Internet=Internet Explorer
Word Processing=Office/Word

Many people do not understand, do not want to understand, are unable to understand, dont care, and/or unwilling to care (pick one or more of those) that such a scenario is NOT the case.


As for BWG's post about the lawsuits, *I* think (through previous MS track records) MS's statements and (not so) veiled threats is an attempt to force smaller *nix/Open Source vendors to bow to pressure from MS in signing their ridiculous agreements - which in turn limits their viability in the Open Source marketplace through a plethora of methods (including but not limited to a loss of trust from many Open Source users, pressure from MS to stifle them as competition, etc). I am sure (again from previous track records) that many smaller OSS developers see it as a way of potentially not being sued out of existence - and hopefully still having some chance at remaining viable in the marketplace.

Heck, as the facts stand, numerous companies have been swallowed up by MS through lawsuits THEY initiated (against MS) due to software that MS has "incorrectly" appropriated - one of the most famous being Stac Electronics. If I were an OSS company, I know I wouldnt forget those lessons... and heck, if a company "in the right" who initiated the lawsuit to protect themselves couldnt survive combatting MS - then how could a company who MS claims is "in the wrong" manage to? The truth of those allegations hardly matters when the lawsuit is costing far more than those companies can manage to afford to pay - they WILL lose - simply, if for no other reason, because they cannot afford to win.

And as BWG also pointed out, yes there is enough of a market for more than one OS... but MS is NOT going to go down without a fight. I believe their latest attempts (with the whole OSS patent issue) is to minimize as many of those suits and damage as many of their OSS competitors as possible to make that fight much less of one. So, yes (also in agreement) MS does see (F)OSS as a threat - as they do Apple.

In that, I think Apple is being (one of) the biggest helps for the (F)OSS industry, because many people, who thought otherwise, are beginning to realize that there are alternatives (ie: in seeing that MacOSX is an alternative, it opens their minds to the thought that there are other alternatives besides Windows). Of course, MS has been very good in ensuring that certain things are not (and probably will never be) feature compatible for MacOSX (like Office) to help leverage back some of that mindshare towards their Windows platform.


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


lwriemen

Quote from: os2monkey on 2007.11.16, 05:45:50
For the most part I agree with you with your profile of the average joe computer user, but I don't agree with you that to be one is not a choice.
Based on your definitions of choice, which were completely orthogonal to the point, I think your choice of the "hear no evil" monkey for an icon was a good one.  ;)

os2monkey

Quote from: lwriemen on 2007.11.17, 06:44:06
Based on your definitions of choice, which were completely orthogonal to the point, I think your choice of the "hear no evil" monkey for an icon was a good one.  ;)
I look forward to hearing specifically how my definition of choice is "orthogonal to the point". Almost 1/2 of your post was talking about "choice" and defining how the average user basically has none. Your right that I didn't comment on the rest of it, because I didn't disagree with the rest of it. I simply talked about how I don't agree that people are these zombie's walking around without free will, programmed by microsoft. People might CHOOSE to be zombie's because it allows them to have more free time or because they prefer it for many reasons. I don't disagree that microsoft uses it's power to maintain itself in a way that is obnoxious to the rest of us, I just disagree with the lack of power you give to the rest of us. That's where we disagree, and i'm happy to accept you have an alternative viewpoint :).. because after all we all have a choice :).


lwriemen

Quote from: os2monkey on 2007.11.17, 07:26:38
I look forward to hearing specifically how my definition of choice is "orthogonal to the point". Almost 1/2 of your post was talking about "choice" and defining how the average user basically has none. Your right that I didn't comment on the rest of it, because I didn't disagree with the rest of it. I simply talked about how I don't agree that people are these zombie's walking around without free will, programmed by microsoft. People might CHOOSE to be zombie's because it allows them to have more free time or because they prefer it for many reasons. I don't disagree that microsoft uses it's power to maintain itself in a way that is obnoxious to the rest of us, I just disagree with the lack of power you give to the rest of us. That's where we disagree, and i'm happy to accept you have an alternative viewpoint :).. because after all we all have a choice :).
Now this is better. I guess I need to clarify some things. You and I and the rest of the OS/2 World.com community aren't Joe Average users. Once you start wanting to improve what comes out of the box from the computer store, in unintended ways, you are no longer Joe Average. There are a lot of Joe Averages using Macs, but none using Linux or OS/2. I would guess that Joe Average accounts for over 80% of personal computer users.

BTW, Joe Average doesn't equal zombie, programmed by Microsoft. Joe Average is just buying what's available. The findings in the anti-trust trial of Microsoft proved that Microsoft limited what was available. This led to the applications barrier to entry, which is the single biggest reason there is no choice.

The rest of us do have power that we exercise by making choices, but we are limited in our choices by Microsoft's monopoly. We don't represent enough buying power to force software or hardware companies to support us, so we have to rely on the programmers among us to provide us with more choices. We also have to rely on government to limit Microsoft's ability to abuse their monopoly.

Free will is not the same as choice, because you can't choose what's not available.

kim

Sorry this is kind of OT; but I couldn't help myself; here is a little video clip that might lighten up this thread...

Dennis

OK, so I'm not 'Joe Average' because I run OS/2 & eCS. I have also used windoze since 1990.
Comparison:

OS/2-eCS easy to develop apps, stable as a rock, easy to work with and solve problems

Windoze Confusing, nobody speaks or writes understandable English(I'm in the US)--it's all 'computerese which to me is done so one has to pay for 'support' to get a problem solved. Trying to put anything together as an 'app' is confusing, difficult, etc.

ddan

Crimosoft is now OPENLY astroturfing with employee "bloggers" supposedly
eliciting commment from developers to influence what Windows 7 will become:
http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/, and they're getting screenful after screenful of
informed invective that I'm happy to say puts my efforts into shadow.

Giggles and groans abound. Here's just what first caught my eye from their
PAID flacks pretending they're "listening":

── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ──
* Removing code.  Sometimes customers just want to remove code.  With small
footprint disks many folks have looked to remove more and more of Windows just
to fit on SSDs.   I've certainly seen some of the tiny Windows installations.
The supported tool for removing code from Windows is to use the "Turn Windows
Features on and off" (in Vista) user interface.   There are over 80 features
in this tool in premium Vista packages today.

Many folks want the list of Windows features that can be turned on / off to be
longer and there have been many suggestions on the site for things to make
available this way.  This is more complex because of the Windows platform -
that is many developers rely on various parts of the Windows platform and just
"assume" those parts are there.  Whether it is a media player that uses the
windows address book, a personal finance package that uses advanced print
spooling, or even a brand new browser that relies on advanced networking
features.  These are real-world examples of common uses of system APIs that
don't seem readily apparent from the end-user view of the software.
── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ── ──

Just a few comments because the two paragraphs are so packed with arrogantly
mistaken premises that a full critique would run long.

1: "this [removal] tool in premium Vista packages today" ── Translation: you
have to PAY EXTRA to be able to GET RID of "features".

2: "a media player that uses the windows address book" ── ICK, ICK, ICK. I
want a media player that JUST plays media. Is that too LITTLE to ask?

3: "a personal finance package that uses advanced print spooling" ── My god,
how many megabytes does it take them to print out a page full of numerals?

4: "a brand new browser that relies on advanced networking features" ── Back
to their old tricks, binding the browser into the kernel, and SECRET functions
not available through published API.

RobertM

Quote from: ddan on 2008.09.08, 08:28:12
Crimosoft is now OPENLY astroturfing with employee "bloggers" supposedly
eliciting commment from developers to influence what Windows 7 will become:
http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/, and they're getting screenful after screenful of
informed invective that I'm happy to say puts my efforts into shadow.

Sadly nothing new. The only thing that has changed since the pre-Win95 days is Microsoft's methods - which were simply updated to reflect newer "technologies" such as the Internet. Back in the pre-Win95 days, they would write press releases for Win95, and send them to the various print media outlets who would either print them as they were, or with some subtle changes or re-wording with one of their (the magazine's) writer's name at the top.

At least this method is a little more open and obvious. We only caught the Win95 fiasco because they sent CompUSA the press release kit as well, and we'd compare it to the various articles in the various printed publications (such as the various Ziff-Davis pubs) we sold at the store - meaning the general populace was horrendously ignorant of such behavior going on.


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


Ben

Greetings.

RobertM, that's how I remember it.

The corruption and back-room deals employed by M$, was, (and is), a matter of course.

Back then this was truly ridiculous in its indulgence, and equally ridiculous in how it was allowed to happen as the courts and the government agencies, went through the motions, giving just a wafer-thin appearance of doing its job.

These practices dragged, (by design), all of commerce, (and thus, the computer industry), down and into, a new, world-wide state of degradation that permeates business, as a whole, (hole?), today.

M$ manipulated statistics, greased palms, trashed the remaining business morals and did little to hide it. M$ also, in my opinion, influenced judges individually, and the Dept. of Justice, (ha), systematically, revealing roots of power that go deep, all the while recognizing no public authority as it was lifted up into the upper stratosphere of corrupt commerce. A megalopoly that sits atop the money pile that we think of as an active and living, economy.

Windows was and is, a useful tool, and I don't mean for those that have to use it. Just think about it, how could such an invasive, water-bloated, balloon of amorphous code ever have become the standard?

Marketing is powerful, more so than most know, but, by itself, marketing could never have gotten this s w o l l e n bag of error-codes and mashed drivers, up and onto a horse, let alone get it into the race!

Yet rolling, puffing, farting and belching, somehow it rolled over the horse, down onto the start line, weaving and hissing across fence posts and gateways, half the time going in the wrong direction, while an army of servants, their pockets and shirts stuffed with newly-printed fiat money, somehow maneuvered it, using twenty-foot poles, grease, sweat and deception, over the finish line and up onto the podium! To finish first! All the while professional jockeys on their sleek steeds were forcibly held back, only there as a show, for a competition that never really existed.

Lacking the ability to finish on its own merits, it is clear that Windows was a 'must be'.